Community Building and User Generated Content Forum

Facebook remains on the lookout for acquisitions after its failed attempt to buy microblogging site Twitter, one of the company's directors and largest investors says. "We're still focusing on growing as much as possible," says Peter Thiel in an interview with BusinessWeek.

Representatives of Twitter liked the sound of $500 million but balked when Facebook said its stock was worth $8 billion to $9 billion. Twitter's team knew that Facebook was letting employees sell stock on the secondary market at company valuations ranging from $2 billion to $4 billion. "We said it's not worth it," the person says. "Don't treat us like children."

At that point, Facebook offered Twitter around $100 million in cash, with the rest of the deal in stock. Facebook said it would come up with the $100 million by selling more of its stock to outside investors.

hahahahaha I'm sorry but this is really funny to me it's 1999 - 2001 all over again! Only this time no possible way to break even / make a profit. At least back in 2000 most businesses could have been profitable with more time / start-up cash / minor tweaks in operating procedure etc.

weird stuff, i think it'll take someboby with an existing network and a website to destroy twitter...who might that be....oh, I see, how about: 1) any telco 2) any existing social network 3) any existing IM player

$100 million in cash refused? maybe they thought it was zimbabwe dollars? oh, I know these folks played computers for so long they thought it was some fake game moneys.

doubtful either of these will be around in a few years. I keep trying to use them both in a meaningful way but spend so much time on crap. Maybe I'm just anti-social to not want to read meaningless crap all day and night to find one good thing in there once a week.

I can come here to WebmasterWorld and find something good in two seconds.

A $2 million second round would have saved my other business venture, one which actually had a valid business plan that had the ability to fund the company (its sister company actually generated its first profits in 2008 - grown organically rather than through a first round funding to a second round). The target was slightly under $100 million in revenues in five years (realistic based on the sister company's performance) Guess what? I could not find any investors in the financial perfect storm of 2008.

I think most entrepreneurs in the trenches (actually in my case, more like in a ditch now, but I digress) find such deals so very frustratating. These folks really have no idea of how very fortunate they are. Perhaps their followers should be called "twits".

have you noticed how all the news shows keep mentioning twitter, either as part of a story like so and so was twittering when they should have been doing whatever, or asking for feedback via twitter. I think its an attempt to increase their popularity (someones palm was probably greased) by making it seem like everyone uses that crap. I've known about twitter for years and have never been impressed, let alone bothered to join or use them. These social-networks are just shuffling the same mindless customer base and eventually will fade away.

Gomvents - good luck with your Zimbabwean dollars! I am a Zimbabwean (exiled in Poland) and believe me, those bits of paper you have are about as likely to make you a profit as Jerry Yang is to become CEO of Google!